Chief Justice Ariffin Zakaria has been accused of fast-tracking the government's appeal against the landmark ruling on the Peaceful Assembly Act (PAA) to the point of fixing the hearing date before the respondents receiving any appeal petition.
"As this appeal is a matter of great public importance and interest, it is our duty to make these facts public," lawyers N Surendran and Latheefa Koya said in a joint statement today.
Surendran and Latheefa are counsel for Selangor deputy speaker Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad, who on April 25, won a landmark Court of Appeal declarationthat criminal punishment for failing to give a 10-day notice ahead of a protest was unconstitutional.
Counsel said they were informed by a phone call yesterday from the Federal Court's deputy registrar that hearing for the appeal was fixed for May 27 even though the date was initially intended for mention.
"Surprisingly, the hearing date on May 27 has been fixed despite the fact that the court has not served the Petition of Appeal upon us.
"The Petition of Appeal is a crucial document containing the appellant's grounds for the appeal," they said.
They added that the deputy registrar had informed them that the expedited move was on the chief justice’s instruction.
'Little time to prepare'
"This leaves only six working days from now to the hearing of the appeal. It should be noted that the appeal will involve lengthy and novel arguments on important constitutional matters relating to the rakyat's fundamental liberties.
"We are instructed by the Federal Court to file written submissions by May 20, 2014, which gives us one working day to prepare submissions," they said.
Furthermore, Surendran and Latheefa said the Federal Court made no attempts to ascertain whether they were free on the said date nor was there any mention or case management.
Section 9(5) provides for a fine of up to RM10,000 if protest organisers fail to comply with Section 9(1) which require a 10-day notice before a demonstration can be held.
In striking out Section 9(5), the Court of Appeal had ruled the law was tantamount to a ban on spontaneous demonstrations, a fundamental right protected under the Federal Constitution.
The Court of Appeal decision has now made the 10-day notice merely advisory in nature but police are insisting that the criminal punishment still applies, pending appeal by the federal government.
However, legal experts have criticised the police for its stance, pointing out that there has been no stay of execution and the law can only be resurrected if the government wins its case at the Federal Court.
"As this appeal is a matter of great public importance and interest, it is our duty to make these facts public," lawyers N Surendran and Latheefa Koya said in a joint statement today.
Surendran and Latheefa are counsel for Selangor deputy speaker Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad, who on April 25, won a landmark Court of Appeal declarationthat criminal punishment for failing to give a 10-day notice ahead of a protest was unconstitutional.Counsel said they were informed by a phone call yesterday from the Federal Court's deputy registrar that hearing for the appeal was fixed for May 27 even though the date was initially intended for mention.
"Surprisingly, the hearing date on May 27 has been fixed despite the fact that the court has not served the Petition of Appeal upon us.
"The Petition of Appeal is a crucial document containing the appellant's grounds for the appeal," they said.
They added that the deputy registrar had informed them that the expedited move was on the chief justice’s instruction.
'Little time to prepare'
"This leaves only six working days from now to the hearing of the appeal. It should be noted that the appeal will involve lengthy and novel arguments on important constitutional matters relating to the rakyat's fundamental liberties.
"We are instructed by the Federal Court to file written submissions by May 20, 2014, which gives us one working day to prepare submissions," they said.
Furthermore, Surendran and Latheefa said the Federal Court made no attempts to ascertain whether they were free on the said date nor was there any mention or case management.
Section 9(5) provides for a fine of up to RM10,000 if protest organisers fail to comply with Section 9(1) which require a 10-day notice before a demonstration can be held.
In striking out Section 9(5), the Court of Appeal had ruled the law was tantamount to a ban on spontaneous demonstrations, a fundamental right protected under the Federal Constitution.
The Court of Appeal decision has now made the 10-day notice merely advisory in nature but police are insisting that the criminal punishment still applies, pending appeal by the federal government.
However, legal experts have criticised the police for its stance, pointing out that there has been no stay of execution and the law can only be resurrected if the government wins its case at the Federal Court.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.